Even though my IQ increased by 120 just by reading that, what exactly would it mean to live in a holographic universe as opposed to other theories?
It means that physical objects may be a manifestation of thought. Instead of space-time, it may be that the structure is: space-time-consciousness. Therefore, existence cannot exist without consciousness.
This belies western traditions in philosophy of subject-object and that the objects we perceive (including ourselves) don’t exist without the existence of our consciousness.
Bishop Berkeley was right. Maybe… ;>
No, it doesn’t. Nothing in that article related anything of the sort.
How come every time some physicists write a paper on cosmology some flakes come out and give it a whole bunch of metaphysical new age flim-flam?
Edit: To remove portions of a diatribe on ontology. I’ll just summarize that it doesn’t “mean” anything. Living on a world that people thought was flat is very much the same as living on a world that is round and surrounded by crystal spherical shells and as it is now as we know it, a big rock hurtling through space. That is, assuming reality exists outside of our own perception, which is really a futile assertion because it means I’m typing this for no one but myself.
It’s just like how mountain heights change depending on what geoid the surveyors are using, but the mountain is a certain, real height at any point in time. Our quantification changes our perception but our perception doesn’t change the actual quantity.